IRD Freewheels : Worth 3x the cost ??

[Tom Sherman]

Adam Kadlubek wrote:
> On 17 Kwi, 02:33, Tom Sherman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> What crank is that? I could use lower gearing on my RANS Rocket.
>
> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities,
> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together.
>
Cool. A 39/28 is a bit high for a 15% grade.

>> I cross-chain on my recumbents all the time, except those with
>> mid-drives, where cross-chaining in the conventional sense can not occur.
>
> Well - crossing the chain on a bent does not really mean anything,
> maybe except on Cruzbike-alikes.
>
Shhhh, don't let the upright riders hear that.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

 

[Michael Press]

In article <[email protected]>,
Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Adam Kadlubek wrote:
> > On 17 Kwi, 02:33, Tom Sherman <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> What crank is that? I could use lower gearing on my RANS Rocket.
> >
> > Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities,
> > 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together.
> >
> Cool. A 39/28 is a bit high for a 15% grade.
>
> >> I cross-chain on my recumbents all the time, except those with
> >> mid-drives, where cross-chaining in the conventional sense can not occur.
> >
> > Well - crossing the chain on a bent does not really mean anything,
> > maybe except on Cruzbike-alikes.
> >
> Shhhh, don't let the upright riders hear that.

Silly boy.

--
Michael Press

 

[Chalo]

Adam Kadlubek wrote:
>
> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities,
> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together.

Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of
an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks.

Chalo

 

[Tom Sherman]

Chalo Colina wrote:
> Adam Kadlubek wrote:
>> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities,
>> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together.
>
> Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of
> an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks.
>
And perhaps Adam would hurt his knees if he used "adult-sized cranks".
Do not assume that just because longer cranks and a lower cadence works
well on an upright, the same is true for a recumbent - the evidence so
far indicates the opposite.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

 

[Clive George]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Chalo Colina wrote:
>> Adam Kadlubek wrote:
>>> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities,
>>> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together.
>>
>> Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of
>> an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks.
>>
> And perhaps Adam would hurt his knees if he used "adult-sized cranks". Do
> not assume that just because longer cranks and a lower cadence works well
> on an upright, the same is true for a recumbent - the evidence so far
> indicates the opposite.

Heck, some people are pushing small cranks for uprights too - Mike Burrows
for example.

cheers,
clive

 

[Chalo]

Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> ChaloColina wrote:
>>
> > Adam Kadlubek wrote:
> >>
> >> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities,
> >> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together.
>
> > Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of
> > an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks.
>
> And perhaps Adam would hurt his knees if he used "adult-sized cranks".
> Do not assume that just because longer cranks and a lower cadence works
> well on an upright, the same is true for a recumbent - the evidence so
> far indicates the opposite.

That sounds like another shortcoming of tried-and-rejected bike
layout.

For what it's worth, I use 127mm cranks on my fixed-gear 'bent.
That's to make up for the naturally short gearing:

http://chalo.org

Chalo

 

[Tom Sherman]

Chalo Colina wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> ChaloColina wrote:
>>> Adam Kadlubek wrote:
>>>> Sugino XD 152mm length, 110 BCD with custom rings (61 TASpecialities,
>>>> 46 Shimano and 34 Stronglight). Long bolts to keep it all together.
>>> Perhaps you'd be better able to "gear down" with your legs (instead of
>>> an umpteen-speed cluster) if you used adult-sized cranks.
>> And perhaps Adam would hurt his knees if he used "adult-sized cranks".
>> Do not assume that just because longer cranks and a lower cadence works
>> well on an upright, the same is true for a recumbent - the evidence so
>> far indicates the opposite.
>
> That sounds like another shortcoming of tried-and-rejected bike
> layout.
>
Pun intended?

Why would shorter cranks (for a given rider) being ideal on a recumbent
compared to an upright be a shortcoming?

> For what it's worth, I use 127mm cranks on my fixed-gear 'bent.
> That's to make up for the naturally short gearing:
>
> http://chalo.org
>
I liked the picture of the big wheel with the fluffy kitty in the seat
better.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

 

[Chalo]

Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> Why would shorter cranks (for a given rider) being ideal on a recumbent
> compared to an upright be a shortcoming?

It's not the absolute crank length, it's the (implied) relative
inability to deal with varying loads and speeds by cranking slower or
faster.

If A.K. has to use closely spaced gears to cope with short cranks, and
short cranks to cope with feet-forward riding position, that seems
like a shortcoming. Everyone from little kids on their first bikes
to Olympic champions on incredibly exotic track machines seems to be
able to pedal slower to go slower, faster to go faster.

> >http://chalo.org
>
> I liked the picture of the big wheel with the fluffy kitty in the seat
> better.

A bit down the page, you'll find a picture of Mama Chicken along with
another of my bikes. Here's a direct link:

http://datribean.com/chalo/images/sidewinder1.jpg

You'll have to content yourself with that for the time being.

Chalo

 

[Tom Sherman]

Chalo Colina wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Why would shorter cranks (for a given rider) being ideal on a recumbent
>> compared to an upright be a shortcoming?
>
> It's not the absolute crank length, it's the (implied) relative
> inability to deal with varying loads and speeds by cranking slower or
> faster.
>
> If A.K. has to use closely spaced gears to cope with short cranks, and
> short cranks to cope with feet-forward riding position, that seems
> like a shortcoming. Everyone from little kids on their first bikes
> to Olympic champions on incredibly exotic track machines seems to be
> able to pedal slower to go slower, faster to go faster.
>
The reasoning behind the short cranks is to reduce the minimum angle at
the knee (with a fully extended leg having an angle of about 180°) while
pedaling.

Most recumbent riders can deal with a fair range of cadences [1], but
doing the equivalent of leg presses while climbing is NOT the proper
technique.

>>> http://chalo.org
>> I liked the picture of the big wheel with the fluffy kitty in the seat
>> better.
>
> A bit down the page, you'll find a picture of Mama Chicken along with
> another of my bikes. Here's a direct link:
>
> http://datribean.com/chalo/images/sidewinder1.jpg
>
Is the sidewinder name due to the wheels not being on a single track,
with alternate single sided mounting? The bike does look a bit too large
for Mama Chicken to ride, however.

> You'll have to content yourself with that for the time being.
>

[1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with
varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed
cassettes these days.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Chalo Colina wrote:
>>> Tom Sherman wrote:
>>>> Why would shorter cranks (for a given rider) being ideal on a recumbent
>>>> compared to an upright be a shortcoming?
>>> It's not the absolute crank length, it's the (implied) relative
>>> inability to deal with varying loads and speeds by cranking slower or
>>> faster.
>>>
>>> If A.K. has to use closely spaced gears to cope with short cranks, and
>>> short cranks to cope with feet-forward riding position, that seems
>>> like a shortcoming. Everyone from little kids on their first bikes
>>> to Olympic champions on incredibly exotic track machines seems to be
>>> able to pedal slower to go slower, faster to go faster.
>>>
>> The reasoning behind the short cranks is to reduce the minimum angle at
>> the knee (with a fully extended leg having an angle of about 180°) while
>> pedaling.
>>
>> Most recumbent riders can deal with a fair range of cadences [1], but
>> doing the equivalent of leg presses while climbing is NOT the proper
>> technique.
>
> Just gear down some and spin more for heaven's sakes. This is not rocket
> science.
> [...]
>
It is if one is riding a RANS Rocket.

One can not gear down effectively if the bike lacks low enough gears.

"We could be rocket scientist" - WISIL motto.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

 

[Chalo]

Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> The reasoning behind the short cranks is to reduce the minimum angle at
> the knee (with a fully extended leg having an angle of about 180°) while
> pedaling.
>
> Most recumbent riders can deal with a fair range of cadences [1], but
> doing the equivalent of leg presses while climbing is NOT the proper
> technique.

I believe you, but that makes me wonder about the relative scarcity of
single-speed 'bents and the relative awfulness of the few I've ever
seen (toy and rental three-wheelers). What's up with that? There's
no 'bent equivalent of a beach cruiser, when in some regards 'bents
are just the utmost expression of the beach-cruiser design ethic. Is
it an ergonomic problem, or just a quirk of the tiny specialty market
for feet-forward bikes? Why aren't there any single-speed 'bent two-
wheelers?

> >http://datribean.com/chalo/images/sidewinder1.jpg
>
> Is the sidewinder name due to the wheels not being on a single track,
> with alternate single sided mounting?

Yes. When you ride it, it feels like a bike that has been slightly
bent in a crash and wants to pull to one side. But when you ride
behind it, it's obvious that the plane of the frame is not oriented in
the direction of travel.

> The bike does look a bit too large for Mama Chicken to ride, however.

I think a chicken would be better suited to a unicycle.

> [1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with
> varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed
> cassettes these days.

They're just the cycling equivalent of young people who adopt a vegan
diet for fashion reasons. That is, they might derive tangible
benefits from it-- they probably won't-- and that's immaterial to the
reason they do it.

Chalo

 

[Tom Sherman]

Chalo Colina wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> The reasoning behind the short cranks is to reduce the minimum angle at
>> the knee (with a fully extended leg having an angle of about 180°) while
>> pedaling.
>>
>> Most recumbent riders can deal with a fair range of cadences [1], but
>> doing the equivalent of leg presses while climbing is NOT the proper
>> technique.
>
> I believe you, but that makes me wonder about the relative scarcity of
> single-speed 'bents and the relative awfulness of the few I've ever
> seen (toy and rental three-wheelers).

Are not upright bicycles in the same relative price range (1/5 to 1/10
of a LBS quality bicycle) also generally awful?

> What's up with that? There's
> no 'bent equivalent of a beach cruiser, when in some regards 'bents
> are just the utmost expression of the beach-cruiser design ethic. Is
> it an ergonomic problem, or just a quirk of the tiny specialty market
> for feet-forward bikes? Why aren't there any single-speed 'bent two-
> wheelers?
>
The upright rider can get rolling or climb steep slopes in a relatively
high gear by doing a major weight shift to each pedal at a very low
cadence. On a recumbent, too high gearing brings the rider back to the
"leg press" scenario.

Also, most recumbent riders are middle aged and relatively affluent
persons who found upright road bicycles too uncomfortable. A beach
cruiser is not a replacement for a road bike, whether upright or recumbent.

>>> http://datribean.com/chalo/images/sidewinder1.jpg
>> Is the sidewinder name due to the wheels not being on a single track,
>> with alternate single sided mounting?
>
> Yes. When you ride it, it feels like a bike that has been slightly
> bent in a crash and wants to pull to one side. But when you ride
> behind it, it's obvious that the plane of the frame is not oriented in
> the direction of travel.
>
>> The bike does look a bit too large for Mama Chicken to ride, however.
>
> I think a chicken would be better suited to a unicycle.
>
The chicken can always use her wings to help balance.

>> [1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with
>> varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed
>> cassettes these days.
>
> They're just the cycling equivalent of young people who adopt a vegan
> diet for fashion reasons. That is, they might derive tangible
> benefits from it-- they probably won't-- and that's immaterial to the
> reason they do it.
>
Yep, being seen with a wide range cassette (and/or a triple crank) at
the coffee shop would be social death. Almost as bad as riding a
recumbent to the Fabrizio Mazzoleni crowd.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

 

[Chalo]

Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> Chalo Colina wrote:
> >
> > I believe you, but that makes me wonder about the relative scarcity of
> > single-speed 'bents and the relative awfulness of the few I've ever
> > seen (toy and rental three-wheelers).
>
> Are not upright bicyclesin the same relative price range (1/5 to 1/10
> of a LBS quality bicycle) also generally awful?

Most cheap _bikes_, yes. But most cheap coaster-brake cruisers are
fine. I expect you could get noticeable refinements in a one-speed
cruiser up to about $1000, but you can get 90% of that much bike for
10% as much money (if you can ride one-size geometry). There just
isn't that much there to get wrong.

> Also, most recumbent riders are middle aged and relatively affluent
> persons who found upright road bicycles too uncomfortable. A beach
> cruiser is not a replacement for a road bike, whether upright or recumbent.

I see what you are saying, but the next logical step from a laid-back,
upright, cushy-seated cruiser bike is something similar but with a
chair.

> > I think a chicken would be better suited to a unicycle.
>
> The chicken can always use her wings to help balance.

Wings are better for balancing than for holding handlebars. I see
chickens "balance the unicycle" when I hold them in my hand.

> >> [1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with
> >> varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed
> >> cassettes these days.
>
> > They're just the cycling equivalent of young people who adopt a vegan
> > diet for fashion reasons. That is, they might derive tangible
> > benefits from it-- they probably won't-- and that's immaterial to the
> > reason they do it.
>
> Yep, being seen with a wide range cassette (and/or a triple crank) at
> the coffee shop would be social death. Almost as bad as riding a
> recumbent to the Fabrizio Mazzoleni crowd.

I managed to miss a recumbent event today (to which all local custom
builders were invited) because my birthday and related activity took
precedence. I was looking forward to rubbing elbows with the bearded
tribe and airing out some foolish contraptions. Unfortunately my Big
Wheel has been down for repairs after a drunken lout in New Orleans
wiped out the Charles Eames shell chair with a well-placed body slam.
The replacement (a long-sought eBay find) ships this way tomorrow,
just a bit too late for the show.

Where _is_ Fab these days? Working his way towards becoming Flabbio,
perhaps. I've missed his style guidance for the faithful and
dismissive contempt for the fallen.

Chalo

 

[Tom Sherman]

Chalo Colina wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Chalo Colina wrote:
>>> I believe you, but that makes me wonder about the relative scarcity of
>>> single-speed 'bents and the relative awfulness of the few I've ever
>>> seen (toy and rental three-wheelers).
>> Are not upright bicyclesin the same relative price range (1/5 to 1/10
>> of a LBS quality bicycle) also generally awful?
>
> Most cheap _bikes_, yes. But most cheap coaster-brake cruisers are
> fine. I expect you could get noticeable refinements in a one-speed
> cruiser up to about $1000, but you can get 90% of that much bike for
> 10% as much money (if you can ride one-size geometry). There just
> isn't that much there to get wrong.
>
Well, the primary advantages of a recumbent are comfort over longer
distances and lower frontal area, neither of which matter much in a
beach cruiser.

The better format for the beach cruiser might well be the crank forward
(CF) upright, as the low speed handling will be more like the
traditional beach cruiser, but with a more comfortable seat and the
ability to put both feet down while seated.

>> Also, most recumbent riders are middle aged and relatively affluent
>> persons who found upright road bicycles too uncomfortable. A beach
>> cruiser is not a replacement for a road bike, whether upright or recumbent.
>
> I see what you are saying, but the next logical step from a laid-back,
> upright, cushy-seated cruiser bike is something similar but with a
> chair.
>
See above about the CF upright.

>>> I think a chicken would be better suited to a unicycle.
>> The chicken can always use her wings to help balance.
>
> Wings are better for balancing than for holding handlebars. I see
> chickens "balance the unicycle" when I hold them in my hand.
>
Would a chicken benefit from a foot retention system?

>>>> [1] The upright roadies seem to be the ones who have trouble with
>>>> varying cadences, to judge by the popularity of 11-21 and 12-23 10-speed
>>>> cassettes these days.
>>> They're just the cycling equivalent of young people who adopt a vegan
>>> diet for fashion reasons. That is, they might derive tangible
>>> benefits from it-- they probably won't-- and that's immaterial to the
>>> reason they do it.
>> Yep, being seen with a wide range cassette (and/or a triple crank) at
>> the coffee shop would be social death. Almost as bad as riding a
>> recumbent to the Fabrizio Mazzoleni crowd.
>
> I managed to miss a recumbent event today (to which all local custom
> builders were invited) because my birthday and related activity took
> precedence. I was looking forward to rubbing elbows with the bearded
> tribe and airing out some foolish contraptions. Unfortunately my Big
> Wheel has been down for repairs after a drunken lout in New Orleans
> wiped out the Charles Eames shell chair with a well-placed body slam.
> The replacement (a long-sought eBay find) ships this way tomorrow,
> just a bit too late for the show.
>
That was unfortunate.

> Where _is_ Fab these days? Working his way towards becoming Flabbio,
> perhaps. I've missed his style guidance for the faithful and
> dismissive contempt for the fallen.
>
Maybe Flabby Fabby is busy riding a recumbent?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<4d43b41c-a822-4b05-ae09-2068a22f02ef@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:

> Where _is_ Fab these days? Working his way towards becoming Flabbio,
> perhaps. I've missed his style guidance for the faithful and
> dismissive contempt for the fallen.
>
> Chalo

He's having something of a recent Renaissance in rbr, which, if you
haven't checked recently, is achieving heights of civility rbt could
only aspire to.

Strange but true.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

 

[Chalo]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
> >
> > Where _is_ Fab these days? Working his way towards becoming Flabbio,
> > perhaps. I've missed his style guidance for the faithful and
> > dismissive contempt for the fallen.
>
> He's having something of a recent Renaissance in rbr, which, if you
> haven't checked recently, is achieving heights of civility rbt could
> only aspire to.
>
> Strange but true.

Dumbass,

I'll have to check it out.

Best Regards,

Chalo

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article
<9e53e461-dd58-4e21-b3b1-f138bad3144d@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> >
> > Chalo wrote:
> > >
> > > Where _is_ Fab these days? Working his way towards becoming Flabbio,
> > > perhaps. I've missed his style guidance for the faithful and
> > > dismissive contempt for the fallen.
> >
> > He's having something of a recent Renaissance in rbr, which, if you
> > haven't checked recently, is achieving heights of civility rbt could
> > only aspire to.
> >
> > Strange but true.
>
> Dumbass,
>
> I'll have to check it out.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Chalo

Yeah, we still do that, though.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."